What is Stability?

A system is said to be stable, if its output is under control. Otherwise, it is said to be

unstable. A stable system produces a bounded output for a given bounded input.
The following figure shows the response of a stable system.

This is the response of first order control system for unit step input. This response
has the values between 0 and 1. So, it is bounded output. We know that the unit
step signal has the value of one for all positive values of t including zero. So, it is
bounded input. Therefore, the first order control system is stable since both the input
and the output are bounded.

Types of Systems based on Stability

We can classify the systems based on stability as follows.

• Absolutely stable system

• Conditionally stable system
• Marginally stable system

Absolutely Stable System

If the system is stable for all the range of system component values, then it is known
as the absolutely stable system. The open loop control system is absolutely stable
if all the poles of the open loop transfer function present in left half of ‘s’ plane.
Similarly, the closed loop control system is absolutely stable if all the poles of the
closed loop transfer function present in the left half of the ‘s’ plane.

Conditionally Stable System

If the system is stable for a certain range of system component values, then it is
known as conditionally stable system.
Marginally Stable System

If the system is stable by producing an output signal with constant amplitude and
constant frequency of oscillations for bounded input, then it is known as marginally
stable system. The open loop control system is marginally stable if any two poles
of the open loop transfer function is present on the imaginary axis. Similarly, the
closed loop control system is marginally stable if any two poles of the closed loop
transfer function is present on the imaginary axis.

Disturbance-Rejection

The principal objective of a feedback controller is typically either disturbance

rejection or setpoint tracking. A controller designed to reject disturbances will take action to
force the process variable back toward the desired setpoint whenever a disturbance or load on
the process causes a deviation.

One of the key functions of a motion controller is to create the trajectories the motor follows
in order to reach the target position (or velocity or torque). As the motor turns, the controller
processes feedback from the encoder and compares the actual position of the motor with the
desired position. If there are any deviations between the actual position and the desired
position, the controller issues commands to correct the error.

Deviations can be caused by inaccuracies in the mechanical components (backlash in screws,

compliance in connecting elements, or errors in mounting surfaces) or by unknown
disturbances — often in the form of unexpected forces on the system that cause the position,
velocity, or torque to rise or fall sharply and unpredictably.

The motor’s ability to follow the given trajectory and achieve the desired position is tracked
and managed by the controller through a function known as command tracking or reference
tracking. (When the controller is monitoring a process variable, such as temperature or fluid
level, rather than the position, speed, or torque of a motion control system, this function is
referred to as setpoint tracking.)

Each gain in the PI (proportional-integral) or PID (proportional-integral-derivative) control

loop affects the system’s reference tracking. In addition, feedforward control, a proactive
control method that predicts the system’s error and injects commands into the control loop to
minimize the error, is often used to improve reference tracking and further minimize the
deviation between the commanded position and the actual position of the motor.

To address unexpected forces that cause the motor to move away from the target value, the
controller uses a function known as disturbance rejection, which processes the disturbance
and provides commands that correct for these unknown forces or conditions.

In control tuning, the proportional gain (kp) determines the amount of disturbance rejection.
This makes sense because the proportional gain issues an error correction signal that is
directly proportional to the error. So when a disturbance occurs, causing the motor to deviate
from the desired state, the proportional gain outputs a correction signal to bring the motor
back toward the desired state. In theory, the higher the proportional gain, the better the
disturbance rejection.

A car’s cruise controller, for example, will throttle up the engine whenever it detects a drop in
the car’s speed during an uphill climb. It will continue working to reject or overcome the
extra load on the car until the car is once again moving as fast as the driver originally
specified. Disturbance-rejection controllers are best suited for applications where the setpoint
is constant and the process variable is required to stay close to it.

In contrast, a setpoint-tracking controller is appropriate when the setpoint is expected to

change frequently and the controller is required to raise or lower the process variable
accordingly. A luxury car equipped with an automatic temperature controller will track a
changing setpoint by adjusting the heater’s output whenever a new driver calls for a new
interior temperature.

Open-loop operations

First, suppose that the feedback path is disabled so that the controller is operating in open-
loop mode. After a disturbance, the process variable will begin to change according to the
magnitude of the load and the physical characteristics of the process. In the cruise control
example, the sudden resistance added by the hill will start to decelerate the car according to
the hill’s steepness and the car’s inertia.

Note that an open-loop controller doesn’t actually play any role in determining how the
process reacts to a disturbance, so the controller’s tuning is irrelevant when feedback is
disabled. In contrast, a setpoint change will pass through both the controller and the process,
even without any feedback. See the Open-Loop Operations diagram.

As a result, the mathematical inertia of the controller combines with the physical inertia of the
process to make the process’s response to a setpoint change slower than its response to an
abrupt disturbance. This is especially true when the controller is equipped with integral
action. The I component of a PID controller tends to filter or average-out the effects of a
setpoint change by introducing a time lag that limits the rate at which the resulting control
effort can change.

In the car temperature control example, this phenomenon is evident when the controller starts
turning up the heat upon receiving the driver’s request for a warmer interior. The car’s heater
will in turn begin to raise the car’s temperature at a rate that depends on how aggressively the
controller is tuned and how quickly the interior temperature reacts to the heater’s efforts. A
direct disturbance such as a burst of sunshine would typically raise the car’s temperature at a
much faster rate because the effects of the disturbance would not depend on the controller
ramping up first.

Closed-loop operations

Of course an open-loop controller can’t really reject disturbances nor track setpoint changes
without feedback, so it makes sense to ask, “What happens to that extra setpoint response
time when the feedback is enabled?” Usually, nothing. Unless the controller happens to be
equipped with setpoint filtering, the setpoint response will remain slower than the disturbance
response by exactly the same amount as in the open-loop case. See the Closed-Loop
Operations diagram.

But since that difference in response times is attributable entirely to the time lag of the
controller, one might wonder if it would still be possible to design a setpoint-tracking
controller that is just as fast as its disturbance-rejection counterpart by tuning it to respond
instantaneously to a setpoint change.
On the other hand, the controller’s mathematical inertia can be minimized without completely
defeating its ability to eliminate errors between the process variable and the setpoint. A fast
setpoint-tracking controller would require particularly aggressive tuning, but that shouldn’t be
a problem so long as the controller never needs to reject a disturbance. But if an unexpected
load ever does disturb the process abruptly, a setpoint-tracking controller will tend to
overreact and cause the process variable to oscillate unnecessarily.

Conversely, a controller tuned to reject abrupt disturbances will typically be relatively slow
about implementing a setpoint change. Fortunately, a typical feedback control loop in an
industrial application will operate for extended periods at a constant setpoint, so the only time
that a disturbance-rejection controller normally experiences a delay because of a setpoint
change is at start-up.
 A controller can be tuned to balance the reference tracking and disturbance rejection
functions, as shown here, or to favor one or the other.

Motion controllers often use both functions — reference tracking and disturbance
rejection — to provide accurate, steady-state performance and to reduce sensitivity
to changing or unexpected loads. However, there are tradeoffs when both functions
are used: the lower the overshoot and settling time for reference tracking, the more
sluggish the disturbance rejection will be, and vice-versa. Tuning the controller
involves finding the appropriate balance between the overshoot and settling time of
the reference tracking function and the response time of the disturbance rejection
function.

Insensitivity and robustness of control systems

Robustness is the ability of the closed loop system to be insensitive to component
variations. It is one of the most useful properties of feedback. Robustness is also what
make it possible to design feedback system based on strongly simplified models.

❖ Effect of parameter variation on overall gain of a degenerative Feedback Control system

The overall gain or transfer function of a degenerative feedback control system depends upon
these parameters i.e. (i) variation in parameters of plant, and (ii) variation in parameter of
feedback system and (ii) disturbance signals.
The term sensitivity is a measure of the effectiveness of feedback on reducing the influence of
any of the above described parameters. For an example, it is used to describe the relative
variations in the overall Transfer function of a system T(s) due to variation in G(s).
Effect of variation in H(s) on T(s) of a degenerative Feedback Control
system